Three Schools of Thought on Democracy’s Rise
1. Modernization Theory
This theory posits that economic development leads to democracy. Key aspects of this development include:
- Free Market
- Secularization
- Urbanization
- Industrialization
Democracy is seen as a result of social and economic modernization, which spreads globally due to globalization.
Seymour Martin Lipset, in his seminal 1959 work “Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Legitimacy,” argued that modernization is a universal experience. As the world modernizes, nations converge towards a similar democratic model. He analyzed four aspects of society:
- Average wealth
- Industrialization
- Urbanization
- Education
Key Questions and Findings:
a) Average Wealth: Lipset concluded, “The more well-to-do a nation, the greater the chances that it will sustain democracy.” This relationship is probabilistic, not causal. Modernization increases the likelihood of democracy but doesn’t guarantee it.
Capitalism and democracy have a complex relationship. Capitalism can exist without democracy (e.g., China), but democracy seemingly requires capitalism to foster the necessary conditions.
Capitalism promotes wealth, growth, a middle class, secularization, and reduced social conflict.
b) Industrialization: Capitalism leads to large groups working together, fostering organization, negotiation, and demonstration.
c) Urbanization: Similar to industrialization, urbanization brings people together, facilitating collective action.
d) Education: Modernization involves secularism. Lipset argued that education undermines religion, which can be an obstacle to modernization. The USA is an exception, with high religiosity alongside modernization.
Consequences of Globalization:
- Growth
- Emergence of a middle class
- Reduced conflicts
- Secularism: Emphasizes virtuous living and private initiative, contrasting with some religious tenets.
Case Study: Scotland and Globalization
Scotland’s current situation reflects globalization’s impact. Scots feel a lack of control over their destiny within a service-based economy. They favor state intervention, while conservatives have reduced their focus on Scotland’s economy.
Debate Between Religions and Economies
Max Weber linked the 19th-century growth of Protestant countries like Germany to a strong work ethic. Catholic countries, however, experienced earlier development. The concept of confession in Catholicism may influence individual responsibility differently than in Protestantism.
Capitalists believe their system offers the best chance for individual progress.
Another important book is “The Civic Culture” by Gabriel Almond and Sydney Verba, which emphasizes tolerance and pluralism as crucial for democracy. However, critics argue it doesn’t fully explain democratic failures or origins.
2. Historical Sociology
Also known as comparative history, this school examines social structures’ conduciveness to democracy. It argues that modernization varies in form and consequence. Comparing countries helps isolate factors influencing democracy’s emergence.
Barrington Moore, a key figure, explored this in his 1966 book “The Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy.” He analyzed eight countries (USA, UK, France, Germany, Japan, China, Russia, India) and identified three political systems:
- Democratic
- Fascist
- Communist
Moore recognized different types of modernity:
- Fascism: Technologically advanced but focused on total control of individuals’ lives and thoughts.
- Communism: Seeks to replace individual identity with a collective one.
Moore identified three main social groups: peasantry, middle class, and landed aristocracy. The relationships between these groups determine a country’s political trajectory.
Moore’s Three Roads to Modernity:
a) The Bourgeois Revolution (USA, UK, France):
Leads to democracy. “No bourgeoisie, no democracy.” Key elements:
- Balance between the crown and landed aristocracy
- Shift towards commercial agriculture
- Absence of an aristocratic-bourgeois coalition against workers and peasants
b) Revolution from Above (Germany, Japan):
Traditional elites control industrialization due to a weak middle class. Often leads to fascism with a strong military. Characteristics:
- Strong aristocracy
- Weak middle class
- Strong peasantry
c) Revolution from Below (China, Russia):
Leads to communism. Characteristics:
- Strong aristocracy
- Weak middle class
- Large, strong peasantry
3. Transitology
This school, also called “agency theory,” focuses on transitions to democracy. It debates the importance of structures versus agencies.
- Structure: Impersonal, social, and economic factors (social determinism).
- Agency: Individuals and groups (“actors” like trade unions) organizing to achieve goals, exercising free will.
Critique of Other Schools:
Transitology criticizes modernization theory for being too deterministic, implying only modern countries can be democratic, condemning poorer nations to dictatorship. It also criticizes historical sociology for suggesting only specific class structures lead to democracy.
Dankwart Rostow
In his 1970 article “Transitions to Democracy,” Rostow shifted the focus from why democracies function to how they are born. He argued that factors ensuring democracy’s operation differ from those enabling its emergence.
Objections to Other Schools:
A society must be democratic before a democratic state can exist. We learn to be democrats through experience.
Democracy as Procedure:
Rostow viewed democracy as a problem-solving mechanism, electing governments to make decisions. Emphasis is on procedure (laws), not substance (values like freedom, security, equality). Procedure enables substance. Tolerance is guaranteed through laws.
- Democracy is less about shared values and more about managing fundamental disagreements.
Rostow’s Thesis:
- Distinguish between function and genesis: Why a democracy works differs from how it was born.
- Correlation and causation: A relationship doesn’t always imply cause and effect.
- Causality is complex: Economic growth may lead to democracy, but democracy might also foster economic growth.
- Probability is not causality: Higher development increases the probability of democracy, but it’s not a guarantee.
- Causality can be reversed: The relationship between social/economic factors and politics isn’t always unidirectional.